Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
My current wheel is 23mm profile. I intend to change to 60mm profile that matches my bike colour. However, understand such wheel is not for climbing. Both wheel may not of the same weight but let say abt 400g different (either way). I know diff. in wt is not a big deal. I was told that the 60mm profile will only benefit if speed exceed 40km/hr. Is that true?

Is there any test that shows the comparison between these 2 types of wheel over the mileage lost on flat or slope? Is it significant or minute. I’m not into racing but also wouldn’t want to sacrifice too much on distance.
 

·
Get me to In&Out
Joined
·
4,775 Posts
Don't dismiss the aero advantage of the wheel. Unless you are in and out of the saddle standing a lot, the acceleration benefit the light wheel gives you might not be as great as the aero advantage while going uphill.
 

·
Recycle King
Joined
·
870 Posts
You should look into 38mm, which is more of a all around wheel if you want the best of both(lightweight and aero) Do a search on it because their are quite of few threads about it in the past.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,494 Posts
In order of importance I've learned for me the best wheel set is the one that:

-is in my price range
-is durable enough to withstand everyday riding w/o a lot of maintenance
-depth/looks
-weight

I've said it before but I'll say it again, the most important aspect of the wheel to me is the tire. So many get caught up in the aero/weight debate and forget about the rubber it seems. A tire can make or break the best or worst wheel set. Just my opinion.

Anyways, the aero/weight debate is just silly for those of us who don't train like a pro or a very good amateurs. IIRC the time advantages of deep rims v. shallow at 40km/h are less than 0.5MPH and after a 5000m climb with wheels 400g difference on a slope of 8% would yield approximately 6 seconds advantage via analyticcycling.com. Check it out for yourself!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
733 Posts
I've got both Zipp 303's (44 mm) and 404'w (58 mm) and there's really not much difference with wind - once you get used to riding with aero wheels. You feel gusts with the deeper wheels more but after a few rides, it's predictable and easily controllable. Inexperienced riders often panic and that's why some say its a problem - which it isn't.

Aero wheels make a positive difference, regardless of speed and there's no basis in the notion that someone has to go 40 k/hr to benefit. In fact, the relative improvements for aero wheels are greater at slower speeds than they are at faster ones.

Aero does trump weight in terms of benefits. Here's a brief summary extracted from much more detailed study but the extract (below) is from a triathlon magazine

Let's do a comparison: Mr. Lightwheels weighs 165 pounds, and rides a bike weighing 17.6 pounds. His twin brother, Aero, is exactly the same. Both can maintain 250 watts of power output in a 40K bike leg, and both face identical wind drag, except for their wheels.

Mr. Lightwheels has conventional wheels lightweight box-section rims with 32 round spokes. Aero has something like Tri-Spokes. (Pick your choice of aerodynamically optimized wheel; I'm using typical numbers.) Standard wheels aren't much lighter, if at all, than aero wheels, but just for fun let's say the conventional wheels are ultralights weighing 200 grams less per wheel.

In a flat 40K time trial, who will win the rider who is lighter, or the rider who is more aero? The answer is the rider with aero wheels will finish more than 28 seconds ahead of his lighter brother.

This includes the effects of the startup acceleration. Even if the bike leg goes steadily up a 3 percent grade, the rider with more aero wheels will win. Only when the grade exceeds 3.7 percent does the bike with lighter wheels have the advantage. And that's 3.7 percent over the whole race, not just the uphill half of a rolling course.

Other analyses have shown aerodynamically efficient wheels are always better, even in bike racing events like criteriums, with the exception of hill-climb events. Even when they weigh more, they are better.
In a flat 40K time trial, the aero wheels would have to weigh many pounds more before their weight soaked up their aero advantage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,424 Posts
some excerpts from the excerpt quoted:
In a flat 40K time trial, who will win the rider who is lighter, or the rider who is more aero? The answer is the rider with aero wheels will finish more than 28 seconds ahead of his lighter brother.

This includes the effects of the startup acceleration. Even if the bike leg goes steadily up a 3 percent grade, the rider with more aero wheels will win. Only when the grade exceeds 3.7 percent does the bike with lighter wheels have the advantage. And that's 3.7 percent over the whole race, not just the uphill half of a rolling course.
Since the OP is not a racer, 28 seconds over 40 km is meaningless. Absolutely meaningless. I'll take light weight over aero for my very hilly, recreational riding any day. Why? Because my (limited) experience with aero wheels is that I hate how they handle in the wind, and especially when going fast downhill with intemittent crosswinds. I also lift and carry my bike quite a bit (in and out of the car, up and down from the rafter hangers, etc.) so losing 400 grams (which is the amount in the hypothetical case) actually can be felt. Finally, I'll take any help I can get up hill and could care less if I'm a tiny, tiny of a fraction slower downhill or on the flats due to the tiny, tiny aero advantage of a deep rimmed wheel.

So I believe the "study" quoted above does little or anything to sell aero wheels to any non-racer.

My selection factors are: first a price point. Within that pricepoint, a balance of durability and weight. Since I'm neither excessively heavy or strong, my balance is probably more on the lightweight end compared to a heavier stronger rider who would need to go a little toward durability at the expense of added weight.

Now, don't get me wrong, I really don't believe saving 200 or even 400 grams on a wheelset is going to make me "faster", just that when hefting the bike it will be lighter, and it will probably feel a little more responsive. And it might make me just a little better able to stay with or not get so far behind my stronger buddies on the 10 mile climb. I can usually go faster downhill, aero or not, because I'm a little more comfortable going fast and am a little more able to tuck down.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,103 Posts
Yeah, that 400g difference is pretty substantial. It really should be more like 200.
and they should really compare against something other than the 32 spoke box rim.


That said, the discussion is silly for several reasons. First off, if you're not racing it doesn't matter. That goes for light weight and aero. Neither matter if you're not racing.

Most of the racers I know--myself included--train on sturdy, heavy wheels. Heck, I race the Tuesday Night Worlds on a 1900+ wheelset (Shimano R501s) and only break out the carbon crushers for the real deal. Next, the debate isn't quite a debate at all, as the majority of high end light weight wheels on the market are "aero" 38-58mm deep carbon tubulars that weigh well under 1400 grams. There are 1200gram "aero" wheels out there!

I say that if most of your riding is recreational, get a sturdy clincher. Something with a 23mm WIDE rim and maybe even a 24/28 build. Or just ride the wheels you have until they fall apart.

Just about the only argument in favor of a recreational rider getting light wheels is mentioned in this thread: Lifting the bike.
 

·
Unrepentant Mountainbiker
Joined
·
624 Posts
I just went through the same debate as you. My Mavic Aksium's freewheel started going out last fall so I decided to get a new wheelset for the upcoming season. I went with a much lighter (almost 800 grams) wheelset and noticed an immediate improvement in the way the bike accelerates. The rim profile is only 22mm so I suspect that I may be giving up some aero advantage over a deeper profile rim but I am willing to give that up for the quicker spin up of the lighter wheels.

And for me it was choice between light weight or deeper profile as my budget was relatively small.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
733 Posts
That said, the discussion is silly for several reasons. First off, if you're not racing it doesn't matter. That goes for light weight and aero. Neither matter if you're not racing.

Most of the racers I know--myself included--train on sturdy, heavy wheels. Heck, I race the Tuesday Night Worlds on a 1900+ wheelset (Shimano R501s) and only break out the carbon crushers for the real deal.
Before I say this, I am a racer myself. Now what you said is either arrogant, from jealousy, or hopefully just not thought out. If someone wants to go faster and wants to spend the money, why is that silly? Is it because you think fast equipment only belongs to racers?

Also most of the people I train with use thief race wheels all the time. The belief about saving race wheels for races is old stuff. Modern wheels are durable. I've got Zipp 303s now that have 30,000 miles on them and have never been touched except for new bearings last year. It's far better to train hard and long on race wheels so you aren't surprised during a race by something like a wind gust.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,424 Posts
Before I say this, I am a racer myself. Now what you said is either arrogant, from jealousy, or hopefully just not thought out. If someone wants to go faster and wants to spend the money, why is that silly? Is it because you think fast equipment only belongs to racers?
...t.
I dont' think you were referring specifically to my comment, and I think we actually agree on the racer vs. non racer thing. But I did say that a 28 second advantage of an aero wheel vs. a non-aero wheel in a 40 km time trial is meaningless to a non racer. He/she will never notice it when riding with the buddies on a vigorous afternoon ride. I didn't say that because I think that non-racers shouldn't have and enjoy top quality wheels. I just mentioned it because the choice between aero and light weight - if it boils down to that sort of advantage for aero - is meaningless for a non racer. The non racer should simply buy the wheels he/she wants and can afford and enjoy the less objective benefits of a good wheel set. For me, that's mostly "feel" in that lighter wheels just feel better, to me both when I schlepp the bike in and out of the car, up and down off the ceiling hooks, etc. AND they feel snappier when I ride the bike. Worth it to me, an old slow duffer (it's worth it to a limited extent of course, about $600-$700!... but would totally understand if someone of my ilk was willing to spend 2-3X that for the enjoyment of it).

A good quality, lightweight aero wheel wouldn't feel that great to me overall because I don't like the feeling in cross winds and especially when going fast downhill where I really don't care if I squeeze the last 1-2 mph out of the run but do care deeply when my bike gets buffeted when I round a corner and come into a cross wind. I like to minimize that and feel a shallower wheel helps. Plus, on the flats and rollers, I really doubt at my speed that an aero wheel is achieving it's full potential of advantage.

I also agree with the statement you made about durability because - for my purposes - I' haven't yet found a wheel that doesn't hold up to my daily usage no matter what the weight.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top